Permission not required
Court of Zeeland-West-Brabant 04-12-2024
Relocation due to split-up
After the end of their relationship, the mother decided to move to a new residence with her daughter. The father requested the court to compel the mother to return to their original residence, claiming that she needed his consent to relocate. The court decided that the mother did not require the consent of either the father or the court to relocate, because she has sole custody and she is not preventing contact between father and daughter, and the distance between the two cities is not that great.
Facts
During their relationship, the parents had a daughter in 2023. Although the father acknowledged his daughter during the pregnancy, the mother retains sole parental authority. After the relationship ended, the mother moved to a different residence with her daughter. This prompted the father to initiate summary proceedings.
Father’s request
The father requests the court to rule that the mother must return to the original place of residence within four weeks of the judgment being served. He also requests the court to impose a penalty payment for each day the mother fails to comply with this order. Additionally, the father requested the court to establish a temporary visitation arrangement, as he claimed to have had limited contact with his daughter since the relocation.
Mother’s reaction
The mother countered that she did not need the father’s consent to relocate, as he does not have parental authority over their daughter. She further explained that the relocation was not voluntary, as she left the home with police assistance due to escalating tensions and incidents of domestic violence by the father. The mother also stated that she has consistently allowed contact between the father and their daughter, although communication between her and the father has been challenging.
Court’s decision
Under established case law, the custodial parent – in this case the mother – is free to decide where to live. If the parents had joint parental authority, the mother would have needed either the father’s or the court’s permission to relocate. However, since the mother has sole parental authority and has not obstructed contact between the father and daughter, no consent was required for the relocation.
Distance manageable
The court therefore rejected the father’s request to compel the mother to return to the original residence. It found the distance between the original residence and the mother’s new residence manageable. The court did establish a temporary visitation arrangement to ensure regular contact between the father and daughter.
You can read the full court decision here: ECLI:NL:RBZWB:2024:8279
Read more about child relocation on our website.
All blogs from The Author:
- The use of Foreign Experts in 1980 Hague Convention Cases
- Cross-Border Child Relocation Dispute: Strategic Legal Intervention Between Egypt and Vietnam
- Child Placement and Co-Parenting in Italy
- Getting a child from the jungle
- Dealing with international child abduction
- No return order due to ratified parental agreement
- Abducted in Italy
- Father’s Rights in International Law
- Care arrangement from Dubai
- Return order to Israel
- Supporting families and colleagues through the CALA
- International Law in Domestic Courts: A Note on Child Litigation in the UK
- The wishes of a child in a Hague Convention procedure in Hungary
- The voice of the child in Hungarian abduction procedure
- Towards a Comprehensive Approach to International Child Abduction Situations
- Act of Fraudulent Commission of Reality
- Article 13b defence
- My child has been abducted to Brazil
- Return order not required
- Brazil’s new era in child abduction cases
- ASIME congress november 2023
- International Child Abduction and The Hague Convention
- International child abduction case leads to indirect recognition of LBGTQ+ families in Greece (?)
- What is the law with parental child abduction in the UK?
- Return to Russia?